A plan lands at Ben Gurion International Airport. Photo by Golf Bravo/Wikimedia Commons

It’s not news to most ears that Israel’s security considerations have been used as fodder by those seeking to delegitimize the country. We often see how a story involving Israeli soldiers trying protect our borders or maintain public order is spun into something much worse by anti-Israel forces, to the detriment of Israel’s image. We know that what is generally remembered from these stories is the pro-Palestinian activist being hit in the face, not that seconds earlier he was throwing rocks at soldiers; or that nine Turkish activists were killed on a ship, not that they beat Israeli commandos with clubs and knives moments earlier, while purporting to be “peaceful” activists.

Last week, Israel had the opportunity to defeat negative images of itself and win over the hearts and minds of some 35 non-Jewish tourists when they visited the country, most for the first time, for none other than my wedding. These tourists, close friends from the U.S. and Europe, had a truly wonderful time and most said they couldn’t wait to visit again. But these buoyant sentiments came crashing down on their way out of the country.

In the weeks prior to their arrival, after I managed to convince them to come to Tel Aviv (which itself was not easy), I set out to promote Israel to them with full force. I did my best to etch into their minds that this would be a worthwhile and unforgettable trip. I hoped that I would be able to share with them a very important part of my life — my birthplace and homeland — and that they’d leave with a different, and deeper, understanding of Israel than they may have had from the news. My family worked on a comprehensive itinerary for them, including tours throughout the country, hosted dinners and arranged accommodations and transportation, invited them to my authentic Yemenite henna ceremony, and hoped they would come away with a cherished experience. I even wrote a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu detailing their experience and telling him this was the way to delegitimize the delegitimization of Israel.

In short, it turned out to be a very rewarding trip for everyone involved, just as I had hoped.

What I failed to be prepared for was the hard time that airport security would give one of my guests, an old friend who happens to be Muslim. I knew she’d be flagged by security because of her Muslim-sounding last name, and she predicted it would happen as well. In fact, she was very accepting of it, saying she understood the reasons behind the security checks.

This friend, whom I have known since I was 15, is an American citizen who has never been preoccupied with Middle East politics, but unfortunately she fell prey to the brunt of the conflict, the lingering suspicion between Muslims and Jews here that seems constantly to blind everyone to the idea that these two groups can get along.

And still, my friend spent her week in Israel enjoying every moment. She had only praise for the different sites she saw, the authentic experiences she was a part of, and the hospitality she was shown by my and my husband’s families.

After airport security kept her for over an hour when she entered the country, I thought the worst was over.

But at the airport on her way back to the U.S., she was again subject to intense security checks, but this time much worse. Out of 15 other friends who were to board the flight with her, airport security stopped only her, searching her entire body from individual strands of hair down to her toes. They opened all her bags, sifted through all her belongings, swabbed them and put them through x-ray machines. They checked her belongings and checked them again. They held her for over two hours, releasing her just 30 minutes before her flight.

Later, when she returned to the U.S., she told me it would all have been fine, that even though it was a blatant act of racial profiling, she understood why they needed to do it, the way that we Israelis don’t take issue with these checks because we know they are for our own security.

What she said was unbelievable, however, was the utter disregard with which she and her belongings were treated. At no point during her security check did anyone explain to her what was happening. When she asked why they forced her to check in her carry-on bag instead of letting her take it on the plane like everyone else, they refused to answer, simply telling her she couldn’t. And worst of all, when they searched her belongings, they cracked her cell phone and punctured holes in her sports shoes, permanently damaging them. When she pointed out the damage, a security guard abruptly told her to send them an email about it. And that was that.

She later told me that she had a wonderful trip but that it was overshadowed by her treatment at the airport. And although she was the only one of my out-of-town friends who was hassled by airport security, her experience ultimately affected everyone, tainting their trip. After all my efforts to paint a picture of Israel as a tolerant, open, free, modern and vibrant place that, despite its many security problems, has been able to truly thrive, this last incident at the airport and my friends’ subsequent reactions to it broke my heart.

Here was a chance for Israel to win over 35 new fans, but it was botched. Instead, my friends left with a bad taste in their mouths.

Before angry readers accuse me of suggesting there should be no more airport security checks, I want to say I am very much in favor of these checks. Israel’s airport security is unparalleled and many countries, including the U.S., have emulated some of its strategies.

However, it would not be the worst thing in the world if airport security guards were instructed to remember that they are dealing with human beings. It would not be a bad idea if Israeli citizens in general remembered this in the ways they treat each other as well as tourists, most of whom come to Israel with good intentions. And Israel needs this kind of tourist.

The Tourism Ministry frequently boasts about record numbers of travelers visiting Israel each month. But we don’t really know what image these travelers leave with. Are they leaving with a positive view and becoming sort of “goodwill ambassadors” for the country? Or are they leaving disgruntled and offended by how they may have been treated, telling others never to come visit?

The government invests a great deal of money and resources in hasbara aimed at countering Israel delegitimization campaigns. But anyone concerned with battling negative images of Israel abroad should remember that the work starts right here at home.

]]>https://michaltoiba.com/2012/09/03/hasbara-starts-at-home/feed/0A plan lands at Ben Gurion International Airport.mtoibaA plan lands at Ben Gurion International Airport.BDS scorecard: A whole lot of spinhttps://michaltoiba.com/2012/07/10/bds-scorecard-a-whole-lot-of-spin/
https://michaltoiba.com/2012/07/10/bds-scorecard-a-whole-lot-of-spin/#respondTue, 10 Jul 2012 10:29:19 +0000http://michaltoiba.com/?p=178Continue reading →]]>The Presbyterian Church’s decision last week not to divest from companies that sell equipment to the Israel Defense Forces in the West Bank was hailed as a victory for Israel and a setback for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. But the Church’s decision to boycott two Israeli companies — Ahava and Hadiklaim Israel — that operate beyond the Green Line, disappointed Israel supporters and was seen by some as a win for the BDS campaign. Following the Church’s vote, each side scrambled to claim that it won this round of the battle. But what does the Church’s decision really mean for Israel and the BDS movement? Is the boycott campaign actually working?

Since the beginning of 2012, the BDS movement has claimed a number of wins, and its detractors have highlighted a number of its loses:

Wins:

• In June 2012, Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI), a top U.S. investment firm, disclosed that it had removed bulldozer manufacturer Caterpillar, Inc. from its index of socially responsible corporations. BDS campaigners said Caterpillar’s role in “Israeli human rights violations” was one of the factors in the decision. MSCI’s decision prompted financial retirement fund giant TIAA-CREF to divest $72 million in Caterpillar stock. A month earlier, Friends Fiduciary divested $900,000 worth of shares in Caterpillar.

• The United Methodist Church (UMC) decided during its annual conference to accept a boycott of “products made by Israeli companies operating in occupied Palestinian territories.”

• The Norwegian Finance Ministry announced in June that the Government Pension Fund Global, a state fund that is Europe’s largest equity investor, would divest $1.4 million worth of shares from Israeli construction firm Shikun & Binui due to its construction projects in east Jerusalem.

• In April, the Co-operative Group, the U.K.’s fifth largest food retailer, announced that it would terminate trade with companies that export produce from Israeli settlements. In a related move, South African and Danish authorities announced that they planned to require merchants “not to incorrectly label products that originate from the Occupied Palestinian Territory as products of Israel.”

• Several internationally known artists and musicians heeded calls by the BDS campaign to cancel shows or avoid performing in Israel over the past year, including Jon Bon Jovi, Pete Seeger, Vanessa Paradis and Cat Power.

• Student organizations at universities in Canada, Arizona and Massachusetts, among others, passed resolutions calling on university administrations to divest from companies that supply Israel with military equipment.

Losses:

• While it accepted a boycott of Israeli settlement produce, the United Methodist Church at its annual conference rejected a proposal to divest from three companies whose products are used by the IDF in the West Bank, following in the path of the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church, the United Church of Christ and others that have rejected past divestment proposals.

A closer and look at some of the purported BDS wins demonstrates that the movement is all bark but no bite. Photo by: Mohamed Ouda / Creative Commons Attribution.

• In March, the Park Slope Food Co-op in New York rejected a motion to hold a referendum on whether to boycott products from Israel.

• Despite many British BDS initiatives over the years, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said in March that commerce between the U.K. and Israel soared 34 percent in 2011 “The people calling to boycott Israel make a lot of noise, but their influence is very small,” British Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould said in March.

• Musicians such as Madonna, Guns N’ Roses, Ziggy Marley, and Justin Bieber, among many others, have performed in Tel Aviv over the past year, rejecting BDS calls to boycott Israel.

• Despite the intense efforts of pro-Palestinian protesters to stop the show, Israel’s Habima theater company performed “The Merchant of Venice” at London’s Globe Theater in May.

• In June, the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) rejected calls to remove Israel as host of the 2013 European Under-21 Championship.

• In February, the University of California in San Diego voted down a divestment resolution proposed by the university’s Students for Justice in Palestine group. Additionally, ahead of a BDS conference at the University of Pennsylvania in February, the university’s president clearly stated that UPenn “does not support sanctions or boycotts against Israel.”

—

Based on this list, the BDS movement’s battle against Israel is a whole lot of spin.

Many have said this before me and many will likely say it after me, but it needs to be said, again and again, lest anyone thinks Israel is crumbling under the pressure of boycotts, as stories about often-exaggerated BDS successes in the international and even local media will have you believe.

A closer and more informed look at some of the “wins” listed above will demonstrate that BDS is all bark but no bite.

• Some reports that surfaced after MSCI’s removal of Caterpillar from its social responsibility index raised questions about the extent to which BDS played a role in the downgrade. A statement released by MSCI on June 4 said: “Caterpillar is involved in a long-running controversy regarding the use of its bulldozers by the Israeli Defense Forces in the Occupied Palestinian Territories … this controversy did not trigger the ratings downgrade in February 2012.” While BDS took the credit for the downgrade, there were other factors involved in the move, including a labor dispute and a plant closing down in Canada. (See a good analysis of the MSCI move here.)

• The announcements by the South African and Danish authorities that they wanted to begin labeling products from the West Bank were just that — announcements. A source close to the issue in Brussels told Haaretz in May that “it was still unclear whether the announcement by the two countries was a new directive or just a recommendation.”

• All the supposed BDS victories surrounding divestment resolutions passed by university student organizations have never been able to make it past the final round. To date, not a single university has sold its shares of stocks that have been targeted by the BDS movement, or has adopted a formal academic boycott of Israel.

The list goes on and on, and only highlights what the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs said in March: “Despite expending considerable persuasive efforts at pushing through resolutions calling for boycotts and divestment … thereby giving the appearance of a public relations success, such calls have in most cases met with refusal and rejection.”

Some even say BDS is losing steam.

Professor Gerald Steinberg of Bar-Ilan University and president of NGO Monitor told me he sees the BDS movement as “declining.”

“In 11 years they’ve accomplished almost nothing and they are also unlikely to get the kind of resources that they had this year,” Steinberg said. “They have less resources each year as they go along, and as more and more is being found out about them … “It’s all spin and no substance. If 300 Presbyterians, or even 3,000 Presbyterians, don’t buy Ahava products, it’s not going to make any difference. On the contrary, in some cases it’s been a positive impact — people go out of their way to buy these products.”

But every few months a story like this — about how the EU may be able to ban trade with Israeli settlements without being in violation of international law — will pop up and suggest that the BDS movement could be gaining traction.

Professor David Newman, dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, who has previously come out against the academic boycott on Israel, told me, “The moment you start making distinctions between the occupied territories and Israel, whether it’s in Europe or in America, it’s much easier to have supporters for that policy than when it’s a blanket sort of statement referring to boycotts or BDS and Israel as a whole. There are a lot of people out there who will sign on for boycotts on things emanating out of the territories because as far as they’re concerned, these are occupied territories and everything there is illegal.”

Asked if he thought the EU would eventually decide to ban trade with Israeli settlements, Newman told me, “I would think that the EU would not go in that direction because it raises all sorts of political issues, but again it makes it easy for them to use these arguments and say, well, we’re just going to boycott the occupied territories.”

For now, at least, it seems the BDS movement’s impact on Israel will remain trivial. But BDS needs to prove its legitimacy much more than Israel does, and it will continue to employ PR tactics and whatever other means it can use to further its goals. Any purported victories added to the BDS scorecard should be taken with a grain of salt.